Pornography: Right, Wrong?

My Word

Banning Porn Is Not 'Censorship' But Democracy In Action.

May 23, 1993|By JAMES D. BRAMLETT

Harry Truman once remarked about the America of his youth: ''In those days, right was right and wrong was wrong, and you didn't have to talk about it.''

Today, some people seem confused about what is right and wrong, forcing us to talk about it, and write articles. Values, however, are only one of the arguments against pornography. Law and logic are also weapons.

Law. The hollow cry of the porn promoters is ''freedom of speech.'' However, no rational person believes in totally free expression, without limits. We can stop someone from crying ''fire'' in a crowded theater. We can also draw the line elsewhere, if personal harm may be caused or public sensitivities outraged. Your freedom stops where my space begins.

The Supreme Court has ruled against pornography in, for example, the 1973 Miller vs. California case, plus in more than two dozen other landmark cases. Banning porn is not ''censorship'' but democracy in action. Simply stated: There is no constitutional, freedom of speech argument for hard-core pornography. Case closed.

Logic. Porn proponents claim it is ''victimless.'' Nothing could be further from the truth. There is incontrovertible proof of pornography's personal and social harm. Numerous scientific studies have proven beyond doubt that pornography is addictive and progressive, and that there is a strong cause and effect relationship between pornography and sex crimes.

Values. Many like to repeat the cliches, ''You cannot legislate morality,'' or ''You cannot impose your values on others.'' Nonsense. That is what the entire legal system is all about: the codification of a culture's values. It is just a question of whose values we codify. Porn peddlers would like to legislate their own definition of morality and impose their own values on the rest of us.

Historically, like it or not, America's values have been rooted in Judeo-Christian principles, covering all manner of ''values'' subjects. Morality was first codified about 3,500 years ago when Moses was given the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai. ''You shall not commit adultery'' (Exodus 20:14) constituted a full 10 percent of those divine demands, in context forbidding sex outside of male/female marriage, something expressly promoted by pornography. About 2,000 years ago, Christ affirmed these laws and explained their deeper intent.

The ''values'' objection is broad-based and not just from religious ''extremists,'' as some would want us to believe. For example, on July 25, 1986, religious leaders representing 150 million Americans - Catholic, Protestant and Jewish - met and endorsed the report from the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography. This was probably the most profound display of religious unity in human history, but, not surprisingly, it received only scant coverage from the news media.

Conclusion. There is no valid argument for pornography. It is not protected expression. It has a high victim rate. It is contrary to the predominant values of our culture. As an $8 billion to $10 billion industry, it mainly benefits organized crime and is crime's third-largest money-maker behind gambling and prostitution. Porn's principal proponents are the profiteers, their highly paid attorneys and, predictably, the American Civil Liberties Union.